Mesh type used in optimization and numerical simulation

[tuzitt]

Describe the bug
hello, I use SU2 to do shape optimization for M6 wing. I discover SU2_GEO can not identify the section shape correctly if I use the structured grid. But it can correctly identify the section shape，airfoil，when I use the unstructured grid. Does it means the unstructured grid is the only mesh type can be used in shape optimization?
I use a unstructured grid do shape optimization, my objective is minimizi drag with fixed lift, I got a model with less drag in SU2. I used the SU2_CFD module to verify whether the optimized model really reduces drag with more volume mesh. I got a nice result. Compared to the original model, the optimized model has reduced drag. But when the same grids, original model grid and optimized model grid, is used for numerical simulation in Fluent, I got a bad result. there is almost no drag reduction, and drag, lift and pitching moment are all smaller than SU2. Is there something wrong with the grid or something else?
I used SU2 to simulate the structural grid of the CRM model downloaded from the https://aiaa-dpw.larc.nasa.gov. The drag and lift are consistent with the result of Fluent. But pitching moment is 5 times of that calculated by Fluent. I think maybe there is something wrong with my configuration. But I got a relatively correct pitching moment when I use the same configuration to similate with a unstructured grid. This makes me doubt the mesh type.
I am so confused with these problems. I will appreciate very much if someone can give me some advice？

• SU2 Version: [e.g., v6.2.0]